It will come as no surprise to you, Mr. Lemay, that I do not agree with you as far as the summit is concerned. The solutions are indeed widely known: added value, research and development, etc. We've been aware of this for 20 years. I recall that when I started at the union, there was talk of added value and people wondered why we could not produce some. There are psychological reasons why we only did what Mr. Rigato said we had done: tapping the resource in the most basic way possible. I would say that it's that type of attitude which we mainly have to change. It is hard to do when you have a century's worth of thinking in a given direction.
If I may I'd like to draw a small parallel, because we are here before the Standing Committee on Natural Resources. We are currently experiencing exactly what Mr. Rigato said, in the western oil fields. Today, in 2008, we are experiencing the same thing, and in fact it is undermining our manufacturing industry.
Let's get back to the forest industry. People believe mindsets have changed, but I would say that that is not the case. We need a summit to shake things up a little, to get everyone around the table and bury the past, and turn towards the future. Pre-19th century mindsets no longer serve us. That is the reason we believe we need a summit, something major to get people to think differently.